City taxpayers were probably a little wide eyed after seeing the bill for St. Albert 50+ Club’s renovation project. What started as a relaxing night out ballooned into a chic five-star meal complete with a bottle of Dom Perignon, Unfortunately, no one remembers ordering off the ritzy side of the menu.
Sixty-three per cent. That is how far the project soared over budget since council originally approved the $2.37-million expenditure. Council was hit with the first request to add more money to the project back in July after administration received bids nearly $1 million above what it had been estimated.
While understandably concerned, council chose to approve the new budget after it was assured it would not be hit by another major increase later. Fast-forward to Monday’s council meeting when councillors were faced with a decision to once again increase the budget by another $600,000.
Unfortunately, council did not have much of a choice in the matter. The meal was eaten and the bill had arrived. With the 50+ club moved out, furniture sold, and lease agreements in place council could do little more than reach into the taxpayers’ wallets and shell out the dough.
How did this happen? How did a project balloon to $3.87 million –$1.5 million over budget – without council having an opportunity to put a stop to it? There were a number of explanations. Mayor Nolan Crouse said the city does not build many facilities, which might explain why administration underestimated by $900,000. We might be able to swallow that. But it does not explain the additional $600,000 requested less than a month later. Administration pointed the finger at the construction climate in Edmonton.
It is difficult to believe that the budget was so out of sync with market realities. We would expect that this situation would have been caught somewhere between the professional expertise of the contractor doing the bidding and the city doing its due diligence.
Even more flabbergasting and unacceptable is the fact the second request came to council when it was too late. While it makes sense to have the building ready for construction as soon as possible, the move should have waited until the final numbers were in. The club was moving out on July 20, the figures were delivered on July 28.
More than two weeks. That is how long the city knew about the additional costs, but Coun. Sheena Hughes said council was not made aware until the agenda was released on Aug. 14. Since councillors were not monitoring the situation, administration should have informed them of the additional cost and a special meeting called if the timeline was so critical.
Now all we can do is hope the contractor does not have need to bite into the contingency fund or worse yet come back to council for a change order over and above the contingency allotment.
Crouse argued that these things are bound to happen and council needs to accept them for fear future projects might be padded. That reasoning might fly if the discrepancy was between 20 and 35 per cent, but this project requires some serious accountability.
There is a big risk the cost could top out at more than $4 million, nearly double the initial estimate. That is a lofty sum for a simple renovation.
